Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal
От | Jonathan S. Katz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8fd2ae88-49de-26f3-def3-e4381cb7e774@postgresql.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal
|
Список | pgsql-docs |
On 1/25/19 6:46 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 06:41:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: >>> I assume this means we would only keep the current release notes in the >>> git tree too, e.g. 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, etc. >> >> Yeah, I'd imagine that each branch would have just its own release notes. >> >> I'm not sure whether to apply this policy retroactively to the supported >> back branches or just establish it going forward. Maintaining the notes >> could be pretty confusing for the next few years if we do the latter, >> though. > > Agreed. We would need to backpatch. > I am in favor of backpatching. The one "caveat" I will bring up is that once pushed and applied to the site, we would bring introduce a lot of 404s into the website. Doing some research on our traffic analytics on the past 6 months, the only release notes that even registered in the top 500 pages visited were the ones from whatever the newest release was (i.e. 10.4, 10.5, 11.0, 11.1). That, combined with that I don't think we will take an SEO hit from unceremoniously removing the pages even with the sudden rise in 404s, should make it ok to backpatch. Jonathan
Вложения
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: